Getting the gig: Skills vs. style

Pay close attention to each contractor’s ad to figure what they want to know about first — skills or work style.

I bid for contract work on a regular basis, and recently started two new contracts.

The selection processes for the two gigs got me thinking about the way companies choose new people for their organizations. The process usually involves two filters, but the order in which they apply them is significant.

One filter selects for quantifiable skills and experience. How effective this filter will be is based on how well the organization has analyzed the work it wants to have done. Well-structured organizations with narrow job descriptions for contract work (“an experienced editor to edit the latest revision of this book” “an experienced outside sales person to fill this sales position while our regular employee is on National Guard duty”) have great success with this approach. But often this relatively rigid approach leaves organizations deaf to applicants whose strengths are wholistic rather than job-specific: energy, team building, leadership, loyalty, creativity, etc.

The second filter selects for the best stylistic fit with the organization. At its best, the “fit” filter gets the company a smooth transition, clear communication, and a satisfied employee or contractor  — one who’s likely to be with the organization for the long haul. But this filter often accounts for hires who “look like” the rest of the organization when it comes to gender, age, socio-economic background — and that can lead to self-congratulatory group-think and stagnation.

For one of the contract positions I sought, the company filtered applicants first by skill set and then interviewed a few of us to find out if we would be a stylistic fit. Company #2 filtered applicants for style, and then interviewed the compatible folks to see who had a decent skill set — and was really compatible.

The process told me quite a bit about each of the clients, and their priorities. (And I noticed that client #2 seemed to be having a lot more fun with the interview process.)

But it also reminded me that I need to pay close attention to each contractor’s ad to figure out what they want to know about first — skills or work style.

When should you write “for exposure?”

The economy is putting many experienced writers out of jobs and leaving once-busy freelancers fretting over shrinking contracts and vanishing clients. I’ve had one client go out of business and two others are capping my hours on particular pieces of work.

At the same time, there’s still a lot of writing work available. Many companies are advertising for freelancers to come in and do the writing work previously handled by staff writers or agencies. But the bad news is that some of this work has plenty of strings attached and suspiciously little money.
What I’m talking about is a freelancing issue that’s always out there, but which comes into greater prominence in tough times: Working for exposure.
It’s tempting to work free (“for exposure”) to develop a portfolio in an area where you may have some experience, but no published or bylined pieces to show to a prospective employer or client. It’s even more tempting to work for exposure when times are bad, and you have available hours to fill.
As a rule, I don’t think writers should work for little or no pay. It’s demeaning to the writer, and it’s unfair to others in the writing field who charge professional-level hourly rates so they can pay the rent and eat. 
But…rules are meant to be broken. And some “pay for exposure” gigs can be just the stepping stone you need to go on and land a great contract or position. Here are some ways to tell if a “pay for exposure” gig is going to be worth your time and effort:
• The people who hire you should be taking the same chances you are. A talented friend doing a start-up who needs you to write the website might be worth your time. A well-paid manager hired by an out-of-state company to recruit a herd of starry-eyed freelancers via Craig’s List is not.
• The publication or website you are writing for should look professional. It should be attractive, sound intelligent, and be kept up to date. Otherwise your “exposure” is likely to be of the embarrassing type. If you find yourself being hired to post fake comments on a rival company’s website, flee!
• The “pay for exposure” work agreement should be clearly seen by all parties as a short-term stepping stone for you — not the start of a system in which you work your way up in their organization. Sadly, it’s not unusual for the types of companies that offer “work for exposure” to try to make the writer feel there is some obligation to stick with the company at low wages because it “gave you exposure.” Keep in mind that when you work for free, you’re giving a company hundreds or thousands of dollars of writing. You have absolutely no further obligation to them.
• You should be having fun, and truly developing your writing skills. This is your chance to prove yourself in a new area of writing, and, if you are lucky, to collaborate with a great editor or a great designer to make your work shine.
%d bloggers like this: